PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
JULM vs. CAOS
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

JULM vs. CAOS - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in FT Vest U.S. Equity Max Buffer ETF - July (JULM) and Alpha Architect Tail Risk ETF (CAOS). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, JULM achieves a 2.67% return, which is significantly higher than CAOS's 0.82% return.


JULM

1D
0.00%
1M
0.80%
YTD
2.67%
6M
3.17%
1Y
7.28%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*

CAOS

1D
0.12%
1M
-0.09%
YTD
0.82%
6M
0.69%
1Y
1.88%
3Y*
4.26%
5Y*
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

JULM vs. CAOS - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)20252024
JULM
FT Vest U.S. Equity Max Buffer ETF - July
2.67%6.91%3.56%
CAOS
Alpha Architect Tail Risk ETF
0.82%2.55%2.59%

Correlation

The correlation between JULM and CAOS is -0.35, meaning they tend to move in opposite directions. This is especially valuable for risk management - when one declines, the other has historically tended to hold steady or rise.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

-0.35

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 26, 2024

-0.30

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.


Return for Risk

JULM vs. CAOS — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.

JULM
JULM Risk / Return Rank: 9393
Overall Rank
JULM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9393
Sharpe Ratio Rank
JULM Sortino Ratio Rank: 9696
Sortino Ratio Rank
JULM Omega Ratio Rank: 9696
Omega Ratio Rank
JULM Calmar Ratio Rank: 8585
Calmar Ratio Rank
JULM Martin Ratio Rank: 9494
Martin Ratio Rank

CAOS
CAOS Risk / Return Rank: 4040
Overall Rank
CAOS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 3434
Sharpe Ratio Rank
CAOS Sortino Ratio Rank: 3737
Sortino Ratio Rank
CAOS Omega Ratio Rank: 3939
Omega Ratio Rank
CAOS Calmar Ratio Rank: 4949
Calmar Ratio Rank
CAOS Martin Ratio Rank: 3939
Martin Ratio Rank
The rank (0–100) shows how this investment's returns compare to the risk taken. Higher = better. Based on the past 12 months of data, combining Sharpe, Sortino, and other metrics used by quantitative funds and institutional investors.

JULM vs. CAOS - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for FT Vest U.S. Equity Max Buffer ETF - July (JULM) and Alpha Architect Tail Risk ETF (CAOS). Risk-adjusted metrics are performance indicators that assess an investment's returns in relation to its risk, enabling a more accurate comparison of different investment options.


JULMCAOSDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+2.13

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+3.42

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.78

1.26

+0.52

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

4.66

2.49

+2.17

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

27.08

6.22

+20.86

JULM vs. CAOS - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current JULM Sharpe Ratio is 3.37, which is higher than the CAOS Sharpe Ratio of 1.24. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of JULM and CAOS, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.


Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


JULMCAOSDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

3.37

1.24

+2.13

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

1.91

1.21

+0.71

Drawdowns

JULM vs. CAOS - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum JULM drawdown since its inception was -4.42%, which is greater than CAOS's maximum drawdown of -3.60%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for JULM and CAOS.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


JULMCAOSDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-4.42%

-3.60%

-0.82%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-1.57%

-0.76%

-0.81%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-3.60%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

0.00%

-1.07%

+1.07%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-0.34%

-0.90%

+0.56%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

0.27%

0.30%

-0.03%

Volatility

JULM vs. CAOS - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for FT Vest U.S. Equity Max Buffer ETF - July (JULM) is 0.19%, while Alpha Architect Tail Risk ETF (CAOS) has a volatility of 0.26%. This indicates that JULM experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than CAOS based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


JULMCAOSDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

0.19%

0.26%

-0.07%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

1.69%

1.03%

+0.66%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.18%

1.52%

+0.66%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

3.76%

4.26%

-0.50%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

3.76%

4.26%

-0.50%

JULM vs. CAOS - Expense Ratio Comparison

JULM has a 0.85% expense ratio, which is higher than CAOS's 0.63% expense ratio.


Dividends

JULM vs. CAOS - Dividend Comparison

Neither JULM nor CAOS has paid dividends to shareholders.


Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions


JULM and CAOS have a correlation of -0.35, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

CAOS has higher volatility (0.26%) compared to JULM (0.19%). In terms of maximum drawdown, JULM dropped -4.42% vs CAOS's -3.60%.

On 1-year performance, JULM leads with 7.28% vs 1.88% for CAOS. On fees, CAOS is cheaper at 0.63% per year. Their volatility is very similar. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 1-year period, JULM has performed better with a 7.28% return vs 1.88%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

CAOS is cheaper with a 0.63% expense ratio, compared with 0.85% for JULM.

JULM and CAOS have nearly identical dividend yields, around 0.00%.

JULM is categorized as Defined Outcome, while CAOS is Options Trading. They also come from different issuers: First Trust and Alpha Architect. Their fees differ too: 0.85% for JULM and 0.63% for CAOS.

JULM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.37 vs 1.24), meaning it's delivered slightly more return per unit of risk over the trailing 12 months. However, this ranking shifts over time - use the Risk/Return Score above for a more comprehensive view that combines Sharpe, Sortino, and other measures used by quantitative funds.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for JULM and CAOS

Add both to a portfolio and optimize allocations for your target — whether that's maximizing returns, minimizing drawdowns, or balancing risk across holdings.

Open Portfolio Optimizer